Justice Kennedy and the Future for LGBTQ Rights and the Courts

Since 1996, with the Romer v. Evans decision, LGBTQ rights in the United States have expanded significantly — from protecting private sexual relations to ensuring marriage equality. It has taken many years, but the Courts have slowly started to recognize the humanity and equal dignity of LGBTQ persons. The pro-LGBTQ court decisions are indebted to Justice Anthony Kennedy's jurisprudence, who has written the majority opinion in every major LGBTQ decision. Kennedy, over the years, has developed a legal narrative around and about the dignity and equal status of LGBTQ persons and their lives. With announcement of his retirement, we should be wary of what the highest Court of the land will have in store for us going forward.

A Trump America - 2 Years Later

Hello from Canada!

I'm back! And since it's been roughly 2 years since my last post I thought it was time to bring this blog back to life.

No, I'm not actually in Canada - I'm here in New Jersey still trudging along. Like everyone else, my life is consumed by work, relationships, and well... life. Donald J. Trump is President of the United States and here I am still living my life as normal - or at least what has now become normal.

I Can't Handle a Trump Presidency

So the US primaries have been going on for quite some time now, but I've been avoiding them pretty much at all costs. With many debates having already happened, we're getting down to the final stretch and soon enough we shall have our nominees from each respective party. For myself and many others that means its time to start coming to terms with who 'the people' have chosen to represent themselves and start thinking further into the future about what it means should they be elected. Thats why there's recently been a surge in articles about Americans fleeing to Canada should Trump actually become president.

I have an admission to make. I am one of those people. And its not something I say lightly. To many it may seem like a joke - as if many of us wouldn't actually leave or aren't serious about following through but its true. I, and many other people, don't want to live in an America where Trump or anyone like him is able to come into power.

Madeleine Albright, Gloria Steinem, and The Problem with White Feminism

Photograph: Agrees Latif/Reuters

It shouldn't depress me as much as it does, but I'm somehow always more disappointed when people who share my name do stupid things. Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem stepped up this week to talk about feminism and how it relates to Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton. Which is something that needs to be said, for all that Senator Bernie Sanders the sort of guy who practices what he preaches, he also has the benefit of being able to do so. Because he is a
white man, he has privileges others don't.

7 Lessons We Need to Learn from Amber Amour

I think it's fairly non-controversial to say that rape victims deserve justice and respect. I've previously written about how we need to start changing the conversation surrounding rape victims and how they need to be recognized for their strength rather than seen as weak. Rape victims are not weak. They are amazingly strong and nobody I know proves that more than my friend Amber Amour. Amber, a rape victim herself, started a non-profit to help raise awareness and support for girls who have been raped. She started the  #StopRapeEducate campaign where she has run workshops around the world educating people about the realities of rape and how to support victims, all the while raising awareness through her street chalk projects.

How to Be An Ally

Fear of being wrong is one of the main factors that prevents people from being even halfway decent allies, they're just so overwhelmed with the fact that they may be called out for not being perfect that they don't even bother to help their fellow humans. I will freely admit that being an ally - to any group - is tough because it forces you to examine your own privilege. You are an Ally because you are a member of the privileged class who has decided to stand up for the marginalized. That means that you benefit from privilege. Even if you are a member of one marginalized group, no person exists in a vacuum. I'm an asexual, disabled woman and yeah the last part is hard for me to admit, but I'm also white and from an affluent family which makes me pretty damn privileged despite the non-hetero, disabled portion of my existence. I benefit from "benevolent sexism" all the damn time because of my whiteness and cisgendered-ness. Just because benevolent sexism is also sexist behavior, that doesn't mean I don't benefit from it.

Is The Purple-Red Scale A Better Way To Come Out?

In honor of National Coming Out Day I thought I'd write about a new method thats been surging around the internet for identifying your sexual orientation. For anyone who is even remotely familiar with the study of sexuality, the name "Kinsey" should ring a bell. For anyone unfamiliar with it, Alfred Kinsey is credited with being one of the first people to study human sexuality and create a scale to measure it. After conducting countless interviews, he came up with what is now called the Kinsey scale. Although, originally the scale only applied to sexual experiences and not desires, it was easily adapted to allow people to plot their orientation on a number scale going from 0 to 6 with 0 being exclusively heterosexual and 6 being exclusively homosexual.

An example of the Kinsey scale for human sexuality (Asexual was not originally included)

Mental Health Awareness Day

Today is mental health awareness day. Having struggled all day to find what to say I'd like to share some thoughts as a member of the LGBTQ+ community, activist, and student representative.

Mental health is often something that is ignored most of the time. We only really talk about mental health when tragedy happens - like mass shootings or the recent shootings in the US (though this is disproportionately applied to white attackers). Even then this is only done to stigmatize mental health, leaving the impression that those with mental health problems are shameful and dangerous.

This is extremely harmful for us all. It makes people not want to talk about their mental problems. Oftentimes it stops many from seeking help and acknowledging that there is a problem at all. I know from experience how harmful this culture is. Having gone through a period of extreme depression, and having lasting social anxiety I know what it is like to think that you are broken, that your mind is working against you and feeling like you have nobody to talk to. I have watched others who feel like they can't talk to anybody suffer in silence.

Mental health is a huge issue for marginalized groups. In general 1 in 6 people in the UK experience mental health issues, but LGBT+ people are 3x more likely to suffer from anxiety disorders and 6x more likely to suffer from depression than heterosexuals? This is especially true for LGBT+ youth (including those in University) and even more so for trans people in particular.

This is a problem that effects everybody though. Everyone has their ups and downs. Especially when dealing with our complex societies stress and anxieties come and go. Some may experience more than others but what is wrong with having support dealing with these changes in mental states? We already have it for physical health.

Physical health is central to how we view the world. From a young age physical health is drilled into us. We are taught about brushing our teeth, washing our hands, watching our step, what we can and can't eat or touch. Really the list goes on and on.  We require physical checks to go to school, university, do sports, all sorts of things. This centrality and exposure lends itself to thinking that talking about and dealing with physical health is 'normal' and acceptable. We need to extend this thinking to mental health for all our sakes.

This mental health awareness day I encourage everyone to try to be just a little bit more open about mental health issues. Remind friends that you are there to talk to, make sure you all know about the support options that are available (at most universities there are counselors of all sorts to help). Stop yourself and others when using ableist language (like "crazy", and "retard(ed)").

Let's work toward building a society where taking care of our minds is viewed just as normal as taking care of our bodies. If we can do that we will all benefit and be better for it.

Why not Polygamy?

By now the news has spread everywhere about the United States Supreme Court's ruling on same sex marriage. The dust is starting to settle, but I want to kick it up again. What now? Not only for gay rights, but what now for marriage? Is marriage now a beacon of equality or is it still an exclusive club only for some, only now same-sex couples have entrance? Specifically, what about polygamy?

It's interesting that many liberals have been ecstatic about same-sex marriage being passed; but if I were to ask them about polygamy, they would instantly turn around and condemn opening up marriage to such relationships. This is not to say that gay marriage and polygamy are the same. They are different and there are different considerations required for each. Yet, even liberals use the same arguments used to oppose gay marriage against polygamy as if they would somehow be successful for one and not the other.

Why not polygamy? The arguments against it are pretty standard, but let's go through them one at a time.

Trans* Issues are Feminist Issues

This is a guest post I wrote on an amazing blog as part of their Feminist Friday series. It originally appeared on Looking for Caroline Marie.

Trans* issues are inherently feminist issues. Yet somehow, this is a controversial statement. It bewilders me to think that other feminists disagree. When people are calling Caitlyn Jenner a man, refusing to include trans* individuals in popular media, or beating and killing trans women of color: how can we as feminists stand by and do nothing? How can we separate our trans* friends and families from our movement?

Finally Some Good Trans Exposure - Or is it?

With the recent unveiling of Caitlyn Jenner's Vanity Fair cover there has been an overwhelming amount of media coverage about Jenner and trans issues as a whole; and I don't know about you, but they have evoked A LOT of feels in me - many of which are in conflict. Breaking down and understanding these responses is important if we are to truly appreciate the situation.

Let me start of by stating very clearly that I am happy beyond expression that there is some kind of trans visibility. The fact that Caitlyn feels secure enough to be her 'true self' is a great accomplishment in itself. Seeing that trans women can not only be recognized but celebrated is sure to help at least some trans people around the globe. And the continuing defense of Caitlyn being respected is encouraging to say the least. But this fixation is not all its cracked up to be.

Unpacking Your Own Bias

In Social Justice circles, we talk a lot about examining your own privilege and understanding your own biases, but we don't talk about HOW people are supposed to go about these things. We only tell them to do it. We don't even offer any kind of support system because unpacking your own internalized bias is the sort of process you're never really done with. There are all sorts of biases that are thrust upon us as children and take a long time to exorcise from our brains and even then, nothing really ever goes away. Essentially, society is a cult and we are all child inductees. In order to fully illustrate the messy process of understanding your own hangups, I've detailed my own attempt at self-actualization here. This is going to get personal, so, consider yourselves warned.

Outside Looking In: Baltimore

I've been thinking about making this post for the past few days now. While there is no shortage of the topics I could write about - SCOTUS hearing same-sex marriage, Norther Ireland's same-sex marriage vote, Nepal, Bali Nine - I keep coming back to Baltimore. This may stem from my own background as an American, and a part of me is very sorry that I don't have the same drive to address more international issues, but I do honestly believe that this is extremely important.

Some disclaimers before I begin: I want to recognize and draw attention to the fact that my interpretation of events comes from an especially privileged background. I am a white, (mostly) cis man, from an upper-middle-class background. While I am gay and do have some limited understanding of the perspective, I don't pretend to compare my understanding of sexual and gender oppression to racial oppression. And as such, everything I say is limited in that respect. For a fuller understanding, listen to those who are the oppressed. My purpose here is not to try to overshadow those voices, but use the platform I am afforded to promote theirs.

It's hard to know where to start when talking about a topic that is so pervasive it feels impossible to break down. Ultimately, the starting point has to be one of recognizing that there is oppression. Racial oppression is real, and we can't go anywhere in this conversation without recognizing that. If you think that race is no longer an issue in society, please take my advice from earlier and go talk to those you think are your equals. Listen and absorb their lived experiences. Look at our system and how it disproportionately effects Black Americans: profiling, arrests, convictions, sentencing - and those are only criminal issues! The system is rigged and it's definitely not rigged against White Americans.

This is the easiest part for people to accept. Granted, this is due to the fairly liberal circles that I've put myself in so it's not necessarily the easiest for everyone; but, once we accept the fact (yes it is a fact) that racial oppression is still an issue in America, then things start to get complicated and divided even amongst otherwise amiable liberals.

The worst way this manifests is when a dialogue about oppression moves from directly addressing the issue to skirting around it by talking about how people should deal with their oppression. And from this we are bombarded, from all sides, with images and messages of peace; of understanding; complacency. When we look at successful civil rights movements, we see those who enacted peaceful protests; we see images of marches full of smiling people holding signs often claiming equality in the name of sameness.

Look at one of today's most successful campaigns: same-sex marriage. How did it grow? What message does it send? It grew through peaceful, political campaigns. Activists working day and night lobbying legislators, talking to the public, and doing all of this with a smile to their target group's face: promoting the idea that same-sex couples aren't changing anything, that they are the same as heterosexuals, that we "gays" aren't angry and radical. I don't want to knock the lobbying and campaigning. There is a huge value in grassroots movements which I've learned from being a part of them. But they aren't immune to criticism and putting forward an image of assimilation, which is problematic.

What does this message of assimilation do? It humanizes the oppressed. They are transformed from this radical monster to something familiar and relatable. Assimilation is what informs these conversations around Baltimore and civil disobedience. Seeing the oppressed Black Americans, who are rioting and angry and desperate, we remove the humanity from them. Calling these people "animals" or "thugs" or talking about controlling their actions denies their humanity. When we look at them through that kind of lens we deny them their right to feel and to be affected by their oppression - sending the message that their feelings are invalid and that they should only be upset in a way that is deemed "acceptable" by their oppressors.

While stripping these people of their humanity in the name of civil obedience, consider too that we are also valuing their group's experiences and lives as lesser than the property that they are damaging. When we say that riots are "not ok" because of the destruction they cause, we communicate that our property matters more to us than they do. Think about that. Our cars and our windows are being placed on a higher priority than the lives of human beings.

This isn't fair or right for us to do to our fellow persons. We can condemn the violence without stripping people of their dignity and humanity. To do this, we must start by recognizing where the violence stems from. Riots- of the political nature- are born out of desperation. They are a symptom of a system that isn't working. A system which is not just leaving behind an entire group of people, but actively fighting against them. Riots are the result of struggles which have been tireless and endless and don't seem to be getting any better. When the oppressed raise their voices and are drowned out by their oppressors or their pleas fall on deaf ears; that is when violence happens.

Recognizing this context is essential to not invalidating people when they react violently to their oppression. It's the difference between chastising the mentally ill and showing compassion. Allowing for empathy with their plight and keeping this empathy at the forefront of our discussions insures that the respect these people deserve as humans is maintained but still allows us to be critical of their actions. This is where the now viral (partial) quote by Martin Luther King Jr. gets its force.

"...I would be the first to say that I am still committed to militant, powerful, massive, non­-violence as the most potent weapon in grappling with the problem from a direct action point of view. I'm absolutely convinced that a riot merely intensifies the fears of the white community while relieving the guilt. And I feel that we must always work with an effective, powerful weapon and method that brings about tangible results. But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity."

King, the most prominent beacon of non-violent protest, demonstrates beautifully the power we can give those who are rioting while still actively being ideologically opposed to their actions. I hesitate to use this example but the expression "condemn the sin not the sinner" comes to mind.

But, even when talking about MLK and the non-violence movement, it is important to remember the context of it all. Part of the reason why King was so praised and given the attention he got was because of the backdrop of the very riots he condemned. This is still true today, perfectly exemplified by the situation in Baltimore. How much media attention did the protest (that went on for six days) get? Next to none. If there hadn't been any violence, how many people do you think would have even been aware a protest happened? It probably would have gotten some attention in a few local papers, maybe a few bloggers, and thats it. Another gathering of voices into the void. And this has been the case for the majority of movements throughout history (if not all of them). Civil rights? Look at Malcom X and the Black Panthers movements. The LGBT movement? Stonewall.

These cataclysmic violent reactions to oppression are the catalysts of social justice movements. Why? Because thats what the media feeds off of. The media doesn't like to report on the quiet (or loud), peaceful protests. Those are "boring". They don't bring in the same number of viewers as a murder or a riot. And this is true of media on all sides of the political spectrum. The only time we start to hear the voices of the protesters is after the violence has permeated the airways, which makes riots almost necessary to any movements' beginnings. This culture of only paying attention when there is violence allows the media to brand the oppressed as 'less than' and unprincipled, turning us against the oppressed rather than the oppression.

But the violence serves as a call to arms, raising awareness that you are not alone in your discontent, showing that people are willing to fight for their dignity, and gives people platforms to speak out on. What statements were we getting from officials and politicians about the problems of Black Americans before this exposure? Even now the leaders of the protest, which served as the backdrop to the Baltimore riots, gain exposure because of the attention garnered from the riots and by condemning the violence which ensued. The sad truth is that, while we condemn violence, it has a very identifiable purpose as a political tool and we need to recognize the historical and political importance it has by listening to and learning from the narrative that rioting tells.

NUS Controversy - Clearing the Air (Part 2/2) - "Dear White Gay Men"

This is a continuation from another post, and is meant to address the other 'big issue' that the media has picked up on (read: blowing out of proportion) from the NUS conferences. Because, again, having represented my university at the LGBT+ conference and being the LGBT+ equality representative elect for my SU, I feel that it's important that you- whether you're a student or just a general member of the concerned public- know the facts.

NUS Controversy - Clearing the Air (Part 1/2) - The 'Drag Ban'

It's time to set something straight (well hopefully not). By now, many people have probably come across the 'controversy' surrounding the NUS (National Union of Students) LGBT+ and Women's conferences. This controversy is being completely fabricated by the media coverage.

Now, whether this is intentional or due to genuine misunderstandings I don't know, but in either case it is extremely problematic. Having represented my university at the LGBT+ conference and being the LGBT+ equality representative elect for my SU, I feel that it's important that you- whether you're a student or just a general member of the concerned public- know the facts.

Feminism isn't Just for Women - Really!

If you have engaged in any way with Feminism in the last decade you've likely come across the term intersectionality. As a huge part of the newest wave of Feminism, intersectionality takes on the reality that no issue occurs in a vacuum. Nobody has only one identity and they all interact and overlap, but this idea still has many who are less involved in Feminism baffled. Thus, all too often you hear claims from MRAs that Feminism only cares about women. The recent Russell Tovey controversy presents an opportune moment to debunk this defeatist attitude.

The Biggest Problem With Men's Rights Is The Men's Rights Movement

The words "Men's Rights Activist" have become a shorthand for the stereotype of a fedora-wearing misogynist who spends most of his days trolling websites, shouting the word "femi-nazis," and man-splaining all over the place. Unfortunately for these staunch supporters of Men's Rights, they've gone and completely destroyed whatever credibility the Men's Rights movement may have had. There are certainly issues that men face which are not given main stream attention, however, most of these stem from our patriarchal society's insistence on strict gender roles. Toxic masculinity is a symptom of the patriarchy, which we feminist have been harping on about for a few generations now.

First Conviction for California's 'Revenge Porn' Law

Originally posted on Inherently Human

California’s new ‘revenge porn’ law has seen its first conviction this month and it’s starting a firestorm of conversation on the internet. Officials are hailing the conviction as a victory with Los Angelos City Attorney Mike Feuer stating, “California’s new revenge porn law gives prosecutors a valuable tool to protect victims whose lives and reputations have been upended by a person they once trusted.” State Senator and author of the law Anthony Cannella says, “I am happy to see my legislation doing what it’s supposed to do — protecting victims.”

While this official praise is strong and positive, the law has had critics from its inception. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was initially critical of the bill(and revenge porn laws in general) citing loose wording as an issue along with a concern for such regulation on free speech. Still, Feuer claims this conviction is sending a strong message to the people that such “malicious behavior will not be tolerated.”

Sadly, the sentiment expressed in response to this conviction has not been nearly as optimistic. Overwhelmingly people are looking to find someone other than the man to blame. Too often the adage, “maybe if you didn’t take naked photos this wouldn’t have happened,” is cited. It would seem that reservations about the effectiveness of such laws are justified.

At least a partial defence of such laws could be that they are still in their infancy. Only 12 states have passed laws on revenge porn; maybe as more adopt similar policies we will see a change in attitudes. More likely though is that the attitude will remain pervasive like victim blaming still is despite rape laws being almost universal.

The victim blaming is only part of the problem with revenge porn laws. But as the conversation grows, we need to be mindful of the way we approach these topics. As they are considered in more jurisdictions, including the UK, we have a renewed opportunity to challenge this narrative and to finally bring the law on this matter into the 21st century.

Re Rose McGowan and Gay Misogyny

Rose McGowan has gotten a lot of attention in the past few days for some comments she made on the Bret Easton Ellis Podcast about the LGBT*Q community. Her comments sparked a lot of outrage online and within the community (including my own) while raising awareness about some issues - although maybe that was unintentional.

Metrosexual to Spornosexual: An exploration of 'male' gender

Mark Simpson - 'Father of the Metrosexual'

Metrosexuality has always been a topic I've avoided. Its a term that was thrown into the public sphere and endorsed by many, but hardly understood by those who used it. In the past I found it to be wholly uninteresting. Straight men obsessing about their looks and their clothes? Not really my area of interest.

This week, I attended a talk by 'the father of the metrosexual' -the man who coined the term- Mark Simpson. Admittedly I wasn't expecting much, but the talk turned out to be extremely enlightening and intriguing.